Randomized Comparison of Everolimus-Eluting Stents and Sirolimus-Eluting Stents in Patients With ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction: RACES-MI Trial

ObjectivesThe aim of the current study was to compare everolimus-eluting stents (EES) with sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) in patients undergoing primary angioplasty.BackgroundDrug-eluting stents may offer benefits in terms of repeat revascularization. However, as shown for first-generation drug-eluting stents, they may be counterbalanced by a potential higher risk of stent thrombosis, especially among patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). No data have been reported so far on the long-term benefits and safety of the new generation of drug-eluting stents in STEMI.MethodsConsecutive STEMI patients admitted within 12 h of symptom onset and undergoing primary angioplasty and stent implantation at a tertiary center with 24-h primary percutaneous coronary intervention capability were randomly assigned to SES or EES. The primary endpoint was a major adverse cardiac event at 3-year follow-up. The secondary endpoints were death, reinfarction, definite or probable stent thrombosis, and target vessel revascularization at 3-year follow-up. No patient was lost to follow-up.ResultsFrom April 2007 to May 2009, 500 patients with STEMI were randomized to EES (n = 250) or SES (n = 250). No difference was observed in terms of baseline demographic and clinical characteristics between the groups. No difference was observed between the groups in terms of number of implanted stents per patient or total stent length. However, a larger reference diameter was observed with SES (3.35 ± 0.51 mm vs. 3.25 ± 0.51 mm, p = 0.001), whereas patients randomized to EES more often received glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors (54.4% vs. 42.4%, p = 0.006). Follow-up data were available in all patients (1,095 ± 159 days). No significant difference was observed between EES and SES in major adverse cardiac events (16% vs. 20.8%, adjusted hazard ratio [HR]: 0.75 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.5 to 1.13], p = 0.17), cardiac death (4.4% vs. 5.6%, adjusted HR: 0.77 [95% CI: 0.35 to 1.71], p = 0.53), recurrent MI (6.4% vs. 10%, adjusted HR: 0.62 [95% CI: 0.33 to 1.16], p = 0.13), and target vessel revascularization (4.8% vs. 4.8%, adjusted HR: 1.00 [95% CI: 0.45 to 2.32], p = 0.99). However, EES was associated with a significant reduction in stent thrombosis (1.6% vs. 5.2%, adjusted HR: 0.3 [95% CI: 0.1 to 0.92], p = 0.035).ConclusionsThis study shows that among STEMI patients undergoing primary angioplasty, EES has similar efficacy as SES, but is associated with a significant reduction in stent thrombosis. (Randomized Comparison of Everolimus Eluting Stents and Sirolimus Eluting Stent in Patients With ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction [RACES-MI]; NCT01684982)     

Safety and Effectiveness of Everolimus-Eluting Stents in Chronic Total Coronary Occlusion Revascularization: Results From the EXPERT CTO Multicenter Trial (Evaluation of the XIENCE Coronary Stent,Performance, and Technique in Chronic Total Occlusions)

ObjectivesThis study sought to evaluate procedural and clinical outcomes among patients undergoing chronic total occlusion (CTO) percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) using contemporary methods and everolimus-eluting stents (EES).BackgroundLimited studies have detailed the procedural and late-term safety and efficacy of CTO revascularization among multiple centers applying modern techniques and with newer-generation drug-eluting stents.MethodsAmong 20 centers, 250 consecutive patients were enrolled for attempted CTO PCI. Procedural and in-hospital clinical outcomes were examined in addition to the 1-year primary endpoint of death, myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularization (major adverse cardiac events [MACE]).ResultsDemographic, lesion, and procedural characteristics included prior bypass surgery: 9.9%; diabetes: 40.1%; lesion length: 36.1 ± 18.5 mm; and stent length: 51.7 ± 27.2 mm. Procedural success, defined as guidewire recanalization with no in-hospital MACE, was 96.4%. Success with antegrade-only methods was 97.9% and 86.2% by retrograde/combined methods, respectively. Compared with a pre-specified performance goal derived from 6 prior CTO drug-eluting stent trials (1-year MACE: 24.4%), treatment with EES was associated with significantly lower composite adverse events for both intent-to-treat (18.5%, 1-sided upper confidence interval: 23.4%, p = 0.025) and per-protocol populations (8.2%, 1-sided upper confidence interval: 12.3%, p < 0.0001). Target lesion revascularization at 1 year was 6.3%. Dual antiplatelet therapy adherence was 53.9% at 1 year, yet subacute definite stent thrombosis occurred in only 2 patients (0.9%), and late probable stent thrombosis occurred in 1 patient (0.5%).ConclusionsIn a multicenter registration trial representing contemporary technique and EES, favorable procedural success and late-term clinical outcomes support CTO PCI in a patient population with high lesion complexity. (EXPERT CTO: Evaluation of the XIENCE PRIME LL and XIENCE Nano Everolimus Eluting Coronary Stent Coronary Stents, Performance, and Technique in Chronic Total Occlusions; NCT01435031)     

Outcomes After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Stents in Patients Treated With Thoracic External Beam Radiation for Cancer

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to assess outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with stents in patients treated with thoracic external beam radiation therapy (EBRT).BackgroundThoracic EBRT for cancer is associated with long-term cardiotoxic sequelae. The impact of EBRT on patients requiring coronary stents is unclear.MethodsWe analyzed outcomes after PCI in cancer survivors treated with curative thoracic EBRT before and after stenting between 1998 and 2012. Reference groups were propensity-matched cohorts with stenting but no EBRT. Primary endpoint was target lesion revascularization (TLR), a clinical surrogate for restenosis. Secondary endpoints included myocardial infarction (MI) and cardiac and overall mortality.ResultsWe identified 115 patients treated with EBRT a median 3.6 years after stenting (group A) and 45 patients treated with EBRT a median 2.2 years before stenting (group B). Long-term mean TLR rates in group A (3.2 vs. 6.6%; hazard ratio: 0.6; 95% confidence interval: 0.2 to 1.6; p = 0.31) and group B (9.2 vs. 9.7%; hazard ratio: 1.2; 95% confidence interval: 0.4 to 3.4; p = 0.79) were similar to rates in corresponding control patients (group A: 1,390 control patients; group B: 439 control patients). Three years post-PCI, group A had higher overall mortality (48.6% vs. 13.9%; p < 0.001) but not MI (4.8% vs. 4.3%; p = 0.93) or cardiac mortality (2.3% vs. 3.6%; p = 0.66) rates versus control patients. There were no significant differences in MI, cardiac, or overall mortality rates in group B.ConclusionsThoracic EBRT is not associated with increased stent failure rates when used before or after PCI. A history of PCI should not preclude the use of curative thoracic EBRT in cancer patients or vice versa. Optimal treatment of cancer should be the goal.     

Hybrid Revascularization for Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to assess the feasibility of hybrid coronary revascularization (HCR) in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease (MVCAD) referred for standard coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG).BackgroundConventional CABG is still the treatment of choice in patients with MVCAD. However, the limitations of standard CABG and the unsatisfactory long-term patency of saphenous grafts are commonly known.MethodsA total of 200 patients with MVCAD involving the left anterior descending artery (LAD) and a critical (>70%) lesion in at least 1 major epicardial vessel (except the LAD) amenable to both PCI and CABG and referred for conventional surgical revascularization were randomly assigned to undergo HCR or CABG (in a 1:1 ratio). The primary endpoint was the evaluation of the safety of HCR. The feasibility was defined by the percent of patients with a complete HCR procedure and the percent of patients with conversions to standard CABG. The occurrence of major adverse cardiac events such as death, myocardial infarction, stroke, repeated revascularization, and major bleeding within the 12-month period after randomization was also assessed.ResultsMost of the pre-procedural characteristics were similar in the 2 groups. Of the patients in the hybrid group, 93.9% had complete HCR and 6.1% patients were converted to standard CABG. At 12 months, the rates of death (2.0% vs. 2.9 %, p = NS), myocardial infarction (6.1% vs. 3.9%, p = NS), major bleeding (2% vs. 2%, p = NS), and repeat revascularization (2% vs. 0%, p = NS) were similar in the 2 groups. In both groups, no cerebrovascular incidents were observed.ConclusionsHCR is feasible in select patients with MVCAD referred for conventional CABG. (Safety and Efficacy Study of Hybrid Revascularization in Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease [POL-MIDES]; NCT01035567).     

Clinical Events and Patient-Reported Chest Pain in All-Comers Treated With Resolute Integrity and Promus Element Stents: 2-Year Follow-Up of the DUTCH PEERS (DUrable Polymer-Based STent CHallenge of Promus ElemEnt Versus ReSolute Integrity) Randomized Trial (TWENTE II)

ObjectivesThis study assessed clinical events and patient-reported chest pain 2 years after treatment of all-comers with Resolute Integrity zotarolimus-eluting stents (Medtronic Vascular, Santa Rosa, California) and Promus Element everolimus-eluting stents (Boston Scientific, Natick, Massachusetts).BackgroundFor both drug-eluting stents (DES), no all-comer outcome data from >12 months of follow-up have been published. Although there is increasing interest in patient-reported chest pain following stenting, data with novel DES are scarce.MethodsThe DUTCH PEERS multicenter trial (TWENTE II) (DUrable Polymer-Based STent CHallenge of Promus ElemEnt Versus ReSolute Integrity) Randomized Trial [TWENTE II]) randomized 1,811 all-comer patients to treatment with 1 type of DES. Monitoring and event adjudication were performed by independent contract research organizations.ResultsThe 2-year follow-up of 1,810 patients (99.9%) was available. The primary composite endpoint target vessel failure occurred in 8.6% and 7.8% of patients treated with zotarolimus- and everolimus-eluting stents, respectively (p = 0.55). Rates of components of target vessel failure were: cardiac death (2.4% vs. 1.9%, p = 0.42); target vessel–related myocardial infarction (2.4% vs. 1.8%, p = 0.33); clinically-indicated target vessel revascularization (4.6% vs. 4.9%, p = 0.83). At 1- and 2-year follow-up, >80% of patients were free from chest pain (no between-stent difference). In addition, >87% of patients were either free from chest pain or experienced pain only at maximal physical exertion, but not during normal daily activities. Patients with chest pain after 12 months at no more than moderate physical effort had a higher risk of target vessel revascularization during the following year (hazard ratio: 1.89 [95% confidence interval: 1.05 to 3.39], p = 0.03).ConclusionsDuring the second year of follow-up, the incidence of adverse clinical endpoints remained similar and low for both DES. The vast majority of patients were free from chest pain.     

Long-Term Efficacy and Safety of Paclitaxel-Eluting Balloon for the Treatment of Drug-Eluting Stent Restenosis: 3-Year Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial

ObjectivesThis study sought to investigate the long-term comparative efficacy and safety of paclitaxel-eluting balloon (PEB), paclitaxel-eluting stent (PES), or balloon angioplasty (BA) for the treatment of drug-eluting stent restenosis.BackgroundThe optimal treatment of drug-eluting stent restenosis remains unknown. Although PEB has shown encouraging results, the long-term clinical efficacy and safety of PEB remains poorly defined.MethodsA total of 402 patients with clinically significant restenosis in limus-eluting stents were randomly assigned to receive PEB (n = 137), PES (n = 131), or BA (n = 134). For this analysis, PEB versus PES and PEB versus BA were compared. The primary efficacy and safety endpoints were target lesion revascularization and the composite of death or myocardial infarction.ResultsAt a median follow-up of 3 years, the risk of target lesion revascularization was comparable with PEB versus PES (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.46, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.91 to 2.33; p = 0.11) and lower with PEB versus BA (HR: 0.51, 95% CI: 0.34 to 0.74; p < 0.001). The risk of death/myocardial infarction tended to be lower with PEB versus PES (HR: 0.55, 95% CI: 0.28 to 1.07; p = 0.08), due to a lower risk of death (HR: 0.38, 95% CI: 0.17 to 0.87; p = 0.02). The risk of death/myocardial infarction was similar with PEB versus BA (HR: 0.96, 95% CI: 0.46 to 2.0; p = 0.91).ConclusionsAt 3 years, the use of PEB as compared with PES to treat patients with limus-eluting stent restenosis has similar efficacy and safety. PEB remains superior to BA. The sustained efficacy without trade-off in safety supports the role of PEB as treatment option for patients with drug-eluting stent restenosis. (Intracoronary Stenting and Angiographic Results: Drug Eluting Stent In-Stent Restenosis: 3 Treatment Approaches [ISAR-DESIRE 3]; NCT00987324)     

Effect of Ischemia Duration and Door-to-Balloon Time on Myocardial Perfusion in ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction: An Analysis From HORIZONS-AMI Trial (Harmonizing Outcomes with Revascularization and Stents in Acute Myocardial Infarction)

ObjectivesThis study sought to investigate the effect of treatment delay on microvascular reperfusion in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients from the large, multicenter, prospective HORIZONS-AMI (Harmonizing Outcomes with Revascularization and Stents in Acute Myocardial Infarction) trial.BackgroundDespite restoration of epicardial blood flow during primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), one-third of patients do not obtain myocardial perfusion due to impairment in the microvascular circulation.MethodsWe examined the effect of symptom onset-to-balloon time (SBT) and door-to-balloon time (DBT) on myocardial reperfusion during primary PCI in STEMI, utilizing resolution of ST-segment elevation (STR) and the myocardial blush grade (MBG). The primary analysis was the relationships between SBT ≤2, >2 to 4, and >4 h and DBT ≤1, >1 to 1.5, >1.5 to 2, and >2 h with MBG and STR. Clinical risk was assessed using a modified version of the Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction risk score for STEMI.ResultsIn 2,056 patients, absent microvascular perfusion (MBG 0/1) and STR (STR <30%) after primary PCI was significantly more common in patients with longer SBT, in patients with both low and high clinical risk profiles. By multivariable analysis, SBT (p < 0.0001), anterior infarction (p < 0.0001), reference vessel diameter (p = 0.005), lesion minimum lumen diameter (p < 0.0001), hyperlipidemia (p = 0.03), and current smoking (p = 0.001) were independent predictors of MBG 0/1, whereas SBT (p = 0.007), anterior infarction (p < 0.0001), and history of renal insufficiency (p = 0.0002) were independent predictors of absent STR. DBT (p < 0.0001) was an independent predictor of MBG 0/1. MBG 0/1 and STR<30% identified patients with increased 3-year mortality.ConclusionsThe present study suggests that delay in mechanical reperfusion therapy during STEMI is associated with greater injury to the microcirculation.     

Three-Year Outcomes After Revascularization With Everolimus- and Sirolimus-Eluting Stents From the SORT OUT IV Trial

ObjectivesThe study sought to compare the risk of late outcome with a focus on very late definite stent thrombosis of the everolimus-eluting stent (EES) with that of the sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) at 3-year follow-up.BackgroundIn the SORT OUT IV (SORT OUT IV Trial), comparing the EES with the SES in patients with coronary artery disease, the EES was noninferior to the SES at 9 months. The SORT OUT IV trial provides long-term head-to-head randomized comparison of the EES with the SES.MethodsWe prospectively randomized 2,774 patients in the SORT OUT IV trial. Follow-up through 3 years was complete in 2,771 patients (99.9%). The 3-year pre-specified endpoints were composites of safety and efficacy (major adverse cardiac events [MACE]: cardiac death, myocardial infarction, target vessel revascularization, and definite stent thrombosis).ResultsAt 3 years, the composite endpoint MACE occurred in 9.8% of the EES group and in 11.1% of the SES group (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.89, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.70 to 1.12). Overall rate of definite stent thrombosis was lower in the EES group (0.2% vs. 1.4%; HR: 0.15, 95% CI: 0.04 to 0.50), which was largely attributable to a lower risk of very late definite stent thrombosis: 0.1% versus 0.8% (HR: 0.09, 95% CI: 0.01 to 0.70).ConclusionsAt 3-year follow-up, the MACE rate did not differ significantly between EES- and SES-treated patients. A significant reduction of overall and very late definite stent thrombosis was found in the EES group. (The SORT OUT IV TRIAL [SORT OUT IV]; NCT00552877).     

Differential Prognostic Effect Between First- and Second-Generation Drug-Eluting Stents in Coronary Bifurcation Lesions: Patient-Level Analysis of the Korean Bifurcation Pooled Cohorts

ObjectivesThe purpose of this study was to investigate the differential clinical outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for coronary bifurcation lesions with 1- or 2-stenting techniques using first- or second-generation drug-eluting stents (DES).BackgroundThe 2-stenting technique has been regarded to have worse clinical outcomes than the 1-stenting technique after bifurcation PCI with first-generation DES. However, there has been a paucity of data comparing the 1- and 2-stenting techniques with the use of second-generation DES.MethodsPatient-level pooled analysis was performed with 3,162 patients undergoing PCI using first- or second-generation DES for bifurcation lesions from the “Korean Bifurcation Pooled Cohorts” (COBIS [Coronary Bifurcation Stenting] II, EXCELLENT [Registry to Evaluate Efficacy of Xience/Promus Versus Cypher in Reducing Late Loss After Stenting], and RESOLUTE-Korea [Registry to Evaluate the Efficacy of Zotarolimus-Eluting Stent]). The 3-year clinical outcomes were compared between 1- and 2-stenting techniques, stratified by the type of DES.ResultsWith first-generation DES, rates of target lesion failure (TLF) or patient-oriented composite outcome (POCO) (a composite of all death, any myocardial infarction, any repeat revascularization, and cerebrovascular accidents) at 3 years were significantly higher after the 2-stenting than the 1-stenting technique (TLF 8.6% vs. 17.5%; p < 0.001; POCO 18.1% vs. 28.5%, p < 0.001). With second-generation DES, however, there was no difference between 1- and 2-stenting techniques (TLF 5.4% vs. 5.8%; p = 0.768; POCO 11.2% vs. 12.9%; p = 0.995). The differential effects of 2-stenting technique on the prognosis according to the type of DES were also corroborated with similar results by the inverse probability weighted model. The 2-stenting technique was a significant independent predictor of TLF in first-generation DES (hazard ratio: 2.046; 95% confidence interval: 1.114 to 3.759; p < 0.001), but not in second-generation DES (hazard ratio: 0.667; 95% confidence interval: 0.247 to 1.802; p = 0.425).ConclusionsPatient-level pooled analysis of 3,162 patients in Korean Bifurcation Pooled Cohorts demonstrated that the 2-stenting technique showed comparable outcomes to 1-stenting technique with second-generation DES, which is different from the results of first-generation DES favoring the 1-stenting technique.     

Mechanisms of Atherothrombosis and Vascular Response to Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Women Versus Men With Acute Myocardial Infarction: Results of the OCTAVIA Study

ObjectivesThis study sought to assess in vivo sex differences in the pathophysiology of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and vascular response to primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).BackgroundThere is no consensus on whether differences in the pathophysiology of STEMI and response to primary PCI between women and men reflect biological factors as opposed to differences in age.MethodsIn this prospective, multicenter study, 140 age-matched men and women with STEMI undergoing primary PCI with everolimus-eluting stent were investigated with intravascular optical coherence tomography, histopathology-immunohistochemistry of thrombus aspirates, and serum biomarkers. Primary endpoints were the percentages of culprit plaque rupture at baseline and everolimus-eluting stent strut coverage at 9-month follow-up as determined by optical coherence tomography.ResultsMen and women had similar rates of plaque rupture (50.0% vs. 48.4%; risk ratio [RR]: 1.03; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.73 to 1.47; p = 0.56). Nonruptured/eroded plaques comprised 25% of all cases (p = 0.86 in men vs. women). There were no sex differences in composition of aspirated thrombus and immune and inflammatory serum biomarkers. At 9 months, women had similar strut coverage (90.9% vs. 92.5%; difference in medians: RR: 0.2%; 95% CI: –0.4% to 1.3%; p = 0.89) and amount of in-stent neointimal obstruction (10.3% vs. 10.6%; p = 0.76) as men did. There were no sex differences in clinical outcome either at 30-day or 1-year follow-up.ConclusionsIn patients presenting with STEMI undergoing primary PCI, no differences in culprit plaque morphology and factors associated with coronary thrombosis were observed between age-matched men and women. Women also showed similar vascular healing response to everolimus-eluting stents as men did. (Optical Coherence Tomography Assessment of Gender Diversity In Primary Angioplasty: The OCTAVIA Trial [OCTAVIA]; NCT01377207)     

Incidence and Potential Mechanism(s) of Post-Procedural Rise of Cardiac Biomarker in Patients With Coronary Artery Narrowing After Implantation of an Everolimus-Eluting Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffold or Everolimus-Eluting Metallic Stent

ObjectivesThis study sought to evaluate the mechanism of post-procedural cardiac biomarker (CB) rise following device implantation.BackgroundA fully bioresorbable Absorb scaffold, compared with everolimus-eluting metallic stents (EES), might be associated with a higher incidence of periprocedural myocardial injury.MethodsIn 501 patients with stable or unstable angina randomized to either Absorb (335 patients) or EES (n = 166) in the ABSORB II trial, 3 types of CB (creatine kinase, creatine kinase-myocardial band, and troponin) were obtained before and after procedure. Per protocol, periprocedural myocardial infarction (PMI) was defined as creatine kinase rise >2× the upper limit of normal with creatine kinase-myocardial band rise.ResultsIncidence of side branch occlusion and any anatomic complications assessed by angiography was similar between the 2 treatment arms (side branch occlusion: Absorb: 5.3% vs. Xience: 7.6%, p = 0.07; any anatomic complication: Absorb: 16.4% vs. EES: 19.9%, p = 0.39). Fourteen patients who presented with recent myocardial infarction at entry with normalized creatine kinase-myocardial band according to the protocol were excluded for post-CB analysis. The overall compliance for CB was 97.8%. The CB rise subcategorized in 7 different ranges was comparable between the 2 treatment arms. PMI rate was numerically higher in the Absorb arm according to the per-protocol definitions, and treatment with overlapping devices was the only independent determinant of per-protocol PMI (odds ratio: 5.07, 95% confidence interval: 1.78 to 14.41, p = 0.002).ConclusionsThere were no differences in the incidence of CB rise and PMI between Absorb and EES. Device overlap might be a precipitating factor of myocardial injury. (ABSORB II Randomized Clinical Trial: A Clinical Evaluation to Compare the Safety, Efficacy, and Performance of Absorb Everolimus Eluting Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffold System Against Xience Everolimus Eluting Coronary Stent System in the Treatment of Subjects With Ischemic Heart Disease Caused by De Novo Native Coronary Artery Lesions [ABSORB II]; NCT01425281).     

Stent Thrombosis in Drug-Eluting or Bare-Metal Stents in Patients Receiving Dual Antiplatelet Therapy

ObjectivesThis study sought to compare rates of stent thrombosis and major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) (composite of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke) after coronary stenting with drug-eluting stents (DES) versus bare-metal stents (BMS) in patients who participated in the DAPT (Dual Antiplatelet Therapy) study, an international multicenter randomized trial comparing 30 versus 12 months of dual antiplatelet therapy in subjects undergoing coronary stenting with either DES or BMS.BackgroundDespite antirestenotic efficacy of coronary DES compared with BMS, the relative risk of stent thrombosis and adverse cardiovascular events is unclear. Many clinicians perceive BMS to be associated with fewer adverse ischemic events and to require shorter-duration dual antiplatelet therapy than DES.MethodsProspective propensity-matched analysis of subjects enrolled into a randomized trial of dual antiplatelet therapy duration was performed. DES- and BMS-treated subjects were propensity-score matched in a many-to-one fashion. The study design was observational for all subjects 0 to 12 months following stenting. A subset of eligible subjects without major ischemic or bleeding events were randomized at 12 months to continued thienopyridine versus placebo; all subjects were followed through 33 months.ResultsAmong 10,026 propensity-matched subjects, DES-treated subjects (n = 8,308) had a lower rate of stent thrombosis through 33 months compared with BMS-treated subjects (n = 1,718, 1.7% vs. 2.6%; weighted risk difference −1.1%, p = 0.01) and a noninferior rate of MACCE (11.4% vs. 13.2%, respectively, weighted risk difference −1.8%, p = 0.053, noninferiority p < 0.001).ConclusionsDES-treated subjects have long-term rates of stent thrombosis that are lower than BMS-treated subjects. (The Dual Antiplatelet Therapy Study [DAPT study]; NCT00977938)     

Comparative Effectiveness and Safety of New-Generation Versus Early-Generation Drug-Eluting Stents According to Complexity of Coronary Artery Disease: A Patient-Level Pooled Analysis of 6,081 Patients

ObjectivesThe purpose of this study was to compare the 2-year safety and effectiveness of new- versus early-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) according to the severity of coronary artery disease (CAD) as assessed by the SYNTAX (Synergy between Percutaneous Coronary Intervention with Taxus and Cardiac Surgery) score.BackgroundNew-generation DES are considered the standard-of-care in patients with CAD undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. However, there are few data investigating the effects of new- over early-generation DES according to the anatomic complexity of CAD.MethodsPatient-level data from 4 contemporary, all-comers trials were pooled. The primary device-oriented clinical endpoint was the composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or ischemia-driven target-lesion revascularization (TLR). The principal effectiveness and safety endpoints were TLR and definite stent thrombosis (ST), respectively. Adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated at 2 years for overall comparisons, as well as stratified for patients with lower (SYNTAX score ≤11) and higher complexity (SYNTAX score >11).ResultsA total of 6,081 patients were included in the study. New-generation DES (n = 4,554) compared with early-generation DES (n = 1,527) reduced the primary endpoint (HR: 0.75 [95% CI: 0.63 to 0.89]; p = 0.001) without interaction (p = 0.219) between patients with lower (HR: 0.86 [95% CI: 0.64 to 1.16]; p = 0.322) versus higher CAD complexity (HR: 0.68 [95% CI: 0.54 to 0.85]; p = 0.001). In patients with SYNTAX score >11, new-generation DES significantly reduced TLR (HR: 0.36 [95% CI: 0.26 to 0.51]; p < 0.001) and definite ST (HR: 0.28 [95% CI: 0.15 to 0.55]; p < 0.001) to a greater extent than in the low-complexity group (TLR p_int = 0.059; ST p_int = 0.013). New-generation DES decreased the risk of cardiac mortality in patients with SYNTAX score >11 (HR: 0.45 [95% CI: 0.27 to 0.76]; p = 0.003) but not in patients with SYNTAX score ≤11 (p_int = 0.042).ConclusionsNew-generation DES improve clinical outcomes compared with early-generation DES, with a greater safety and effectiveness in patients with SYNTAX score >11.     

Novel Approaches for Preventing or Limiting Events (Naples) III Trial: Randomized Comparison of Bivalirudin Versus Unfractionated Heparin in Patients at Increased Risk of Bleeding Undergoing Transfemoral Elective Coronary Stenting

ObjectivesThis study sought to assess the safety and the efficacy of bivalirudin compared with unfractionated heparin (UFH) alone in the subset of patients at increased risk of bleeding undergoing transfemoral elective percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).BackgroundBivalirudin, a synthetic direct thrombin inhibitor, determines a significant decrease of in-hospital bleeding following PCI.MethodsThis is a single-center, investigator-initiated, randomized, double-blind, controlled trial. Consecutive biomarker-negative patients at increased bleeding risk undergoing PCI through the femoral approach were randomized to UFH (UFH group; n = 419) or bivalirudin (bivalirudin group; n = 418). The primary endpoint was the rate of in-hospital major bleeding.ResultsThe primary endpoint occurred in 11 patients (2.6%) in the UFH group versus 14 patients (3.3%) in the bivalirudin group (odds ratio: 0.78; 95% confidence interval: 0.35 to 1.72; p = 0.54). Distribution of access-site and non–access-site bleeding was 18% and 82% in the UFH group versus 50% and 50% in the bivalirudin group (p = 0.10).ConclusionsThe results of this randomized study, carried out at a single institution, suggest that there is no difference in major bleeding rate between bivalirudin and UFH in increased-risk patients undergoing transfemoral PCI. (Novel Approaches in Preventing and Limiting Events III Trial: Bivalirudin in High-Risk Bleeding Patients [NAPLES III]; NCT01465503)     

Radial Versus Femoral Access for Coronary Angiography/Intervention in Women With Acute Coronary Syndromes: Insights From the RIVAL Trial (Radial Vs femorAL access for coronary intervention)

ObjectivesThe purpose of this study was to determine the efficacy and safety of radial versus femoral access in women undergoing coronary angiography/intervention.BackgroundThe risk of bleeding and vascular access site complications are higher in women than in men.MethodsIn a pre-specified RIVAL (RadIal Vs femorAL access for coronary intervention) subgroup analysis, we compared outcomes in women (n = 1,861) and men (n = 5,160) randomized to radial versus femoral access.ResultsOverall, women were at higher risk of major vascular complications compared with men (4.7% vs. 1.7%; p < 0.0001). Major vascular complications were significantly reduced with radial access in women (3.1% vs. 6.1%; hazard ratio [HR]: 0.5; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.32 to 0.78; p = 0.002) and in men (0.7% vs. 2.8%; HR: 0.27; 95% CI: 0.17 to 0.45; p < 0.0001; interaction p = 0.092). Crossover rates were higher with radial compared with femoral access in women (11.1% vs. 1.9%; HR: 5.88; p < 0.0001) and men (6.3% vs. 1.9%; HR: 3.32; p < 0.0001; interaction p = 0.054). Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) success rates were similar irrespective of access site (women: HR: 1.05; p = 0.471; men: HR: 1.00; p = 0.888; interaction p = 0.674), with no differences in PCI complications. In multivariable analyses, female sex was an independent predictor of major vascular complications (HR: 2.39; 95% CI: 1.76 to 3.25; p < 0.0001). There were consistent findings for women and men, with no difference for the primary composite endpoint of death, myocardial infarction, stroke, and non–coronary artery bypass grafting bleeding (women: 3.9% vs. 5.0%; HR: 0.77; 95% CI: 0.50 to 1.19; men: 3.54% vs. 3.5%; HR: 1.00; 95% CI: 0.75 to −1.34; interaction p = 0.325).ConclusionsWomen undergoing coronary angiography and PCI have a higher risk of vascular access site complications compared with men, and radial access is an effective method to reduce these complications.     

Plaque Characterization to Inform the Prediction and Prevention of Periprocedural Myocardial Infarction During Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: The CANARY Trial (Coronary Assessment by Near-infrared of Atherosclerotic Rupture-prone Yellow)

ObjectivesThis study sought to determine whether pre–percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) plaque characterization using near-infrared spectroscopy identifies lipid-rich plaques at risk of periprocedural myonecrosis and whether these events may be prevented by the use of a distal protection filter during PCI.BackgroundLipid-rich plaques may be prone to distal embolization and periprocedural myocardial infarction (MI) in patients undergoing PCI.MethodsPatients undergoing stent implantation of a single native coronary lesion were enrolled in a multicenter, prospective trial. Near-infrared spectroscopy and intravascular ultrasound were performed at baseline, and lesions with a maximal lipid core burden index over any 4-mm length (maxLCBI_4mm) ≥600 were randomized to PCI with versus without a distal protection filter. The primary endpoint was periprocedural MI, defined as troponin or a creatine kinase-myocardial band increase to 3 or more times the upper limit of normal.ResultsEighty-five patients were enrolled at 9 U.S. sites. The median (interquartile range) maxLCBI_4mm was 448.4 (274.8 to 654.4) pre-PCI and decreased to 156.0 (75.6 to 312.6) post-PCI (p < 0.0001). Periprocedural MI developed in 21 patients (24.7%). The maxLCBI_4mm was higher in patients with versus without MI (481.5 [425.6 to 679.6] vs. 371.5 [228.9 to 611.6], p = 0.05). Among 31 randomized lesions with maxLCBI_4mm ≥600, there was no difference in the rates of periprocedural MI with versus without the use of a distal protection filter (35.7% vs. 23.5%, respectively; relative risk: 1.52; 95% confidence interval: 0.50 to 4.60, p = 0.69).ConclusionsPlaque characterization by near-infrared spectroscopy identifies lipid-rich lesions with an increased likelihood of periprocedural MI after stent implantation, presumably due to distal embolization. However, in this pilot randomized trial, the use of a distal protection filter did not prevent myonecrosis after PCI of lipid-rich plaques.     

Coronary Vessel Wall Contrast Enhancement Imaging as a Potential Direct Marker of Coronary Involvement: Integration of Findings From CAD and SLE Patients

ObjectivesThis study investigated the feasibility of visual and quantitative assessment of coronary vessel wall contrast enhancement (CE) for detection of symptomatic atherosclerotic coronary artery disease (CAD) and subclinical coronary vasculitis in autoimmune inflammatory disease (systemic lupus erythematosus [SLE]), as well as the association with aortic stiffness, an established marker of risk.BackgroundCoronary CE by cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) is a novel noninvasive approach to visualize gadolinium contrast uptake within the coronary artery vessel wall.MethodsA total of 75 subjects (CAD: n = 25; SLE: n = 27; control: n = 23) underwent CMR imaging using a 3-T clinical scanner. Coronary arteries were visualized by a T2-prepared steady state free precession technique. Coronary wall CE was visualized using inversion-recovery T1 weighted gradient echo sequence 40 min after administration of 0.2 mmol/kg gadobutrol. Proximal coronary segments were visually examined for distribution of CE and quantified for contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) and total CE area.ResultsCoronary CE was prevalent in patients (93%, n = 42) with a diffuse pattern for SLE and a patchy/regional distribution in CAD patients. Compared with control subjects, CNR values and total CE area in patients with CAD and SLE were significantly higher (mean CNR: 3.9 ± 2.5 vs. 6.9 ± 2.5 vs. 6.8 ± 2.0, respectively; p < 0.001; total CE area: median 0.8 [interquartile range (IQR): 0.6 to 1.2] vs. 3.2 [IQR: 2.6 to 4.0] vs. 3.3 [IQR: 1.9 to 4.5], respectively; p < 0.001). Both measures were positively associated with aortic stiffness (CNR: r = 0.61, p < 0.01; total CE area: 0.36, p = 0.03), hypercholesterolemia (r = 0.68, p < 0.001; r = 0.61, p < 0.001) and hypertension (r = 0.40, p < 0.01; r = 0.32, p < 0.05).ConclusionsWe demonstrate that quantification of coronary CE by CNR and total CE area is feasible for detection of subclinical and clinical uptake of gadolinium within the coronary vessel wall. Coronary vessel wall CE may become an instrumental novel direct marker of vessel wall injury and remodeling in subpopulations at risk.     

Randomized Comparisons Between Different Stenting Approaches for Bifurcation Coronary Lesions With or Without Side Branch Stenosis

ObjectivesThis study sought to evaluate the optimal percutaneous coronary intervention techniques using drug-eluting stents for bifurcation coronary lesions.BackgroundThe optimal bifurcation stenting technique needs to be evaluated.MethodsThe trial included 2 randomization studies separated by the presence of side branch (SB) stenosis for patients having non–left main bifurcation lesions. For 306 patients without SB stenosis, the routine final kissing balloon or leave-alone approaches were compared. Another randomization study compared the crush or single-stent approaches for 419 patients with SB stenosis.ResultsBetween the routine final kissing balloon and leave-alone groups for nondiseased SB lesions, angiographic restenosis occurred in 17.9% versus 9.3% (p = 0.064), comprising 15.1% versus 3.7% for the main branch (p = 0.004) and 2.8% versus 5.6% for the SB (p = 0.50) from 214 patients (69.9%) receiving 8-month angiographic follow-up. Incidence of major adverse cardiac events including death, myocardial infarction, or target vessel revascularization over 1 year was 14.0% versus 11.6% between the routine final kissing balloon and leave-alone groups (p = 0.57). In another randomization study for diseased SB lesions, 28.2% in the single-stent group received SB stents. From 300 patients (71.6%) receiving angiographic follow-up, between the crush and single-stent groups, angiographic restenosis rate was 8.4% versus 11.0% (p = 0.44), comprising 5.2% versus 4.8% for the main branch (p = 0.90) and 3.9% versus 8.3% for the SB (p = 0.12). One-year major adverse cardiac events rate between the crush and single-stent groups was 17.9% versus 18.5% (p = 0.84).ConclusionsAngiographic and clinical outcomes were excellent after percutaneous coronary intervention using drug-eluting stents with any stent technique for non–left main bifurcation lesions once the procedure was performed successfully.     

Outcomes With Cangrelor Versus Clopidogrel on a Background of Bivalirudin: Insights From the CHAMPION PHOENIX (A Clinical Trial Comparing Cangrelor to Clopidogrel Standard Therapy in Subjects Who Require Percutaneous Coronary Intervention [PCI])

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to examine the efficacy and bleeding outcomes of cangrelor in patients in the CHAMPION PHOENIX (A Clinical Trial Comparing Cangrelor to Clopidogrel Standard Therapy in Subjects Who Require Percutaneous Coronary Intervention [PCI]) who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention with bivalirudin.BackgroundCangrelor is a potent intravenous P2Y₁₂ inhibitor with rapid onset and offset. In the CHAMPION PHOENIX, cangrelor compared with clopidogrel significantly reduced 48-h ischemic events including stent thrombosis, without increasing major bleeding. Bivalirudin has demonstrated ischemic outcomes similar to those with heparin plus glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibition, with reduced bleeding but increased early stent thrombosis.MethodsIn the modified intent-to-treat population, 2,059 patients (18.8%) received bivalirudin, with 1,014 patients in the cangrelor treatment arm and 1,045 in the clopidogrel treatment arm.ResultsAt 48 h, the primary endpoint of death, myocardial infarction, ischemia-driven revascularization, or stent thrombosis was lower with cangrelor versus clopidogrel (48 [4.7%] vs. 70 [6.7%]; odds ratio [OR]: 0.68, p = 0.047). Death was similar in both arms (2 [0.2%] vs. 2 [0.2%]). Myocardial infarction was reduced by cangrelor (37 [3.6%] vs. 59 [5.6%]; OR: 0.63, p = 0.03), as was death/myocardial infarction (39 [3.8%] vs. 61 [5.8%]; OR: 0.65, p = 0.04). Cangrelor was associated with a nonsignificant trend toward less stent thrombosis (7 [0.7%] vs. 15 [1.4%]; OR: 0.48, p = 0.10), which was evident within 2 h after percutaneous coronary intervention (p = 0.057). GUSTO (Global Use of Strategies to Open Occluded Arteries) severe bleeding was similar in both arms (2 of 1,021 [0.2%] vs. 2 of 1,055 [0.2%]) as were other bleeding definitions and transfusions. Efficacy and safety results were consistent in patients with stable angina, non–ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome, and ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (p for interaction: 0.62 and 0.29).ConclusionsCangrelor may offer an attractive benefit risk profile when used in combination with bivalirudin.     

Drug-Coated Balloons Versus Second-Generation Drug-Eluting Stents for the Management of Recurrent Multimetal-Layered In-Stent Restenosis

ObjectivesThis study aimed to investigate the clinical outcomes of patients presenting with recurrent drug-eluting stent (DES) in-stent restenosis (ISR) treated with a second-generation DES or with a drug-coated balloon (DCB).BackgroundTo date, there are no reports of DCB treatment and limited data with regard to the efficacy of further DES implantation for recurrent ISR.MethodsBetween January 2008 and December 2013, 171 lesions were assessed for eligibility (82 lesions in the second-generation DES group and 89 lesions in the DCB group).ResultsAcute gain was greater in the second-generation DES group (second-generation DES, 2.09 ± 0.53 mm vs. DCBs, 1.60 ± 0.62 mm, p < 0.001). The rates of major adverse cardiac events were comparable (at 1 year, DES 14.0% vs. DCBs 12.3%; at 2 years, DES 28.8% vs. DCBs 43.5%, p = 0.21). Major adverse cardiac event rates were mainly driven by target lesion revascularization (at 1 year, DES 12.5% vs. DCBs 10.9%; at 2 years, DES 27.7% vs. DCBs 38.3%; p = 0.40). Definite scaffold thrombosis occurred in 2 patients (1 patient in each group). Multivariable analysis revealed ISR recurrence within 1 year (hazard ratio: 2.43, 95% confidence interval: 1.14 to 5.18, p = 0.02) and lesion length (per 10-mm increase) (hazard ratio: 1.15, 95% confidence interval: 1.00 to 1.32, p = 0.049) to be independent predictors of TLR.ConclusionsThe results after both treatments were equivalent. ISR recurrence within 1 year of the first reintervention and lesion length were independent predictors of future target lesion revascularization. Larger studies are required to confirm the late (>1 year) differences with regard to clinical outcomes.